Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dante Society of America

:{{la|Dante Society of America}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dante_Society_of_America Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Dante Society of America}})

Per source searches, does not appear to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. This organization seems like it would be notable as an historical society, but not finding enough significant coverage in reliable sources to qualify an article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:14, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

• Keep as there's significant claims and there's no obvious objections to the easily noticeable sources at [https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Dante+Society+of+America Books]. On such offline-source matters, a browser will not contain everything actually existing. An article can't be fairly judged without considerations to whether sources may not be immediately available if archived, and our Notability guidelines take note of this, thus no different here. SwisterTwister talk 06:26, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

:*Comment – Regarding the links provided in the !vote above in the "Books" link: the first Google results page sources are almost all published by the Dante Society of America. These primary sources do not serve to establish topic notability. Subsequent search pages are providing no significant coverage at all. Not seeing how these WP:GHITS can establish notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:46, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

• Keep Established by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, the first American translator of the Comedy, in 1881, and has been going ever since. Produces a journal that is published by John Hopkins University Press and indexed and abstracted in selective databases and so probably meets the notability criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals) on those grounds alone. (We don't normally separate notable academic journals from their parent organizations). Has a detailed write up from Enciclopedia Dantesca [http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/dante-society-of-america_%28Enciclopedia-Dantesca%29/ here] that is worth reading in translation and makes the significance of the organisation clear. There are also undoubtedly innumerable offline sources for it in scholarly sources since 1881 some of which are listed at the foot of the Treccani article. Perhaps the nominator would like to withdraw now it has been expanded? Philafrenzy (talk) 10:43, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
• Keep per above: notable publisher of an academic journal that meets the general guideline of WP:N and is not otherwise excluded by WP:NOT. Here are just two examples of significant coverage in reliable sources [https://books.google.com/books?id=CY-sAgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false the Dante Encyclopedia], [https://books.google.com/books?id=YxryrYXJCmEC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false The Divine Comedy and the Encyclopedia of Arts and Sciences: Acta of the International Dante Symposium, 13-16 November 1983, Hunter College, New York] (Search for the subject name in quotes in both). Neither of these are promotional sources, neither is published by the organization itself, neither is press release churn. This is enough per WP:N read in the light of WP:CORPDEPTH for notability, and it doesn't fail WP:NOT, so it merits inclusion. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

{{clear}}

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.